that's hilarious and from a year and half ago...
anything happened to that lawsuit?

Knowing US law it's probably been held in limbo by lawyers on the Label's side for all this time.

Depends on the game, probably. Sometimes I watch LPs just to go trough the story in some manner

Oh come on, this is insane. How is this even enforceable? The last thing publishers want is trawling the Internets to find people uploading gameplay videos. That won't do anyone favours.

But it'd fit with their current behavior.

They love being twats, I'm not disagreeing with that, but to stop people from posting videos playing their game that those people *bought* is a brilliant idea if you don't want people to buy your games anymore.

When have they ever acted like they wanted us to buy their games?

As mentioned, that is not the intention behind the bill. The problem is that the wording of it makes exactly that a possible consequence.

And publishers wouldn't have to trawl the internets. Upgrading streaming of copyrighted material to a felony means that it is actually the government's responsibility to do just that. And to prosecute the uploaders. The publishers won't really have any say in the matter. Except of course that they might deliberately, as Notch plans to do with Minecraft in this eventuality, give permission to stream video of their games in the EULA.

Many won't though because they're money grubbing a-holes. :\

Again, the government has bigger fish to fry (well, not really). But if they want to waste tax dollars on what is the least criminal thing on the Internet, by all means. It's not like there are child pornographers online or anything, and publishers will likely put an exemption in the EULA.

I'm not aware of any recent developments. Like GR said, it's probably being held in limbo by the sheer weight of money that the big 4 are throwing at it. Which just goes to prove that the law favours the little guy, right? :P

Keep in mind that the government is composed of many different people, many of them on a serious power trip and with an axe to grind. This is the kind of law that would be jumped on by a DA who has made copyright infringement their personal crusade. Or law enforcement in certain regions would be encouraged by higher up government officials (like the asshat Sen. Hatch) who have a serious axe to grind on copyright for one reason or another. Basically abuse of such a law wouldn't necessarily be systemic, but it would happen, and it would make life very, very miserable for the unfortunate people on the receiving end.

I know you won't respond to this, no-one is responding to me, I assume I am blacklisted, and you have every right not to respond (I was rude to you the other day, I was drunk, sorry). However you have highlighted the point that I think everyone else has been trying to make, it's about trust.

This law has potential for abuse (as long as the $2500 ...) . However at the point where people are saying that laws should not be because the powerful will abuse them, surely you're at a point where your laws are near useless? Next comes revolution. I think this law is entirely innocent in attempting to stop people uploading directly copied material. The fear in what might be done with it does not reflect a failure in the law, but a failure in America. If you don't trust your law, you have no chance at anything, you're at dictatorship or anarchy.

WPegg not trying to be overly mean but we'd rather IMO have a gov't with less rules especially ones that cover things other rules could cover and like having less of a "nanny" state of gov't.

And the stereotype of corrupt US politicians is unfortunately very true to how many politicians act here, so imo many don't trust the gov't/law....that's why every law or bill proposed or passed is scrutinized by every citizen that can comprehend them. For varying reasons and agendas. This is part and parcel also of what being a US citizen is about: Keeping track of your gov't as best you're able within the bounds of current law. Yes, it's not been successful in many occasions lately but if we did nothing instead of a quasi stalemate between the people and the gov't proposing new laws, you'd have them getting more laws passed and the people losing even more.